| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2022 11:10:14 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
Cc: rafael@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
angelogioacchino.delregno@...ainline.org,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] dt-bindings: cpufreq: cpufreq-qcom-hw: Convert to
YAML bindings
On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 at 20:45, Manivannan Sadhasivam
<manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org> wrote:
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.yaml
> + soc {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <1>;
> +
> + cpufreq@...43000 {
> + compatible = "qcom,cpufreq-hw";
> + reg = <0x17d43000 0x1400>, <0x17d45800 0x1400>;
> + reg-names = "freq-domain0", "freq-domain1";
> +
> + clocks = <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>, <&gcc GPLL0>;
> + clock-names = "xo", "alternate";
> +
> + #freq-domain-cells = <1>;
> + };
> + };
Why didn't we migrate to #performance-domain-cells here ? We can keep
the kernel backward compatible to support old DT definitions, but won't it be
better to move to a more generic solution, now that we have one ?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists